Re: Tom Kratman at Baen -- cringeworthy?

On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 08:55:19 -0800 (PST), Herr Oberst <nrvlaw@xxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Jan 7, 11:03?am, "Mike Schilling" <mscottschill...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Monte Davis wrote:
wdst...@xxxxxxxxx (William December Starr) wrote:

Do you
(Mr.Kratmanor Mr. Loewe) live in a universe in which there is
any danger of a U.S. right-winger thinking that he is alone in his
anti-leftist political belielfs?

872 right-wing talk radio hosts and most of the FOX News staff will
assure you that conservative political viewpoints are excluded from
the EmmEssEmm airwaves. From 1262 evangelical/gospel stations and
channels, and ten times that many pulpits, you can learn of the
total domination of godless NYC/Hollywood values.

Scores of disinterested scholars at Cato, Heritage, AEI, Hudson,
Hoover etc. will point out the unquestioned supremacy inside the
Beltway of the lefty think-tank establishment.

And Presidents Reagan, GHW Bush and GW Bush have put in close to 24
years now fighting manfully against the overwhelming power of the
New Deal - Great Society - Transnationalist PC Mafia.

And a GOP administration which had a doormat GOP Congress for its
first six years will tell you that it's the liberal Democrats' fault
that Iraq is such a mess.
There's some blame for both. Did the Admisitration *** up the war?
Clearly, and in more ways than I care to count (though in a couple of
books I went a long way towards illustrating at least a number of
them).

Not all those ways are what is believed in some quarters, however.
There was, for example, an insurgency already in place before we ever
rolled into Iraq so _some_ degree of insurgency was a given. Where
the Administration screwed it up was in not just letting it but to
some extent _causing_ it to get out of hand. Even less defensible was
the refusal to expand the Army, and fill up the Marine Corps, to meet
the predicatable needs of the war or, for that matter, the
_unpredictable_ ones. There is no excuse, by now, for not having an
Army of 18-20 divisions again.

Assuming that Congress (which is NOT "the Administration" you are
ranting against here) could have actually been persuaded to vote for
such a thing (and funded it), just where do you propose getting the
people to man these extra divisions, Colonel?

Instead? We've got the ten we started
with plus some spurious redesignation of, for the most part, already
existing forces as "Special Operations Forces" and a slight increase
in the number of combat companies, overall.

The blame for liberal democrats? Well, among other things, I can't
help but recall various polls over the last few years showing that
from 17 to 22% (those are the numbers I saw, there may have been some
higher and lower) of the populace want us to lose and a like number
who don't know if they want us to win. (Don't know? How the ***
does one not know? Be as clueless as a Bill Snyder? Maybe.) I
suspect a correlation between those figures and liberal democrats
approaching unity and can't consider it credible that that feeling
doesn't pop up among and motivate liberal Dems in congress. To think
that knowledge of this doesn't exist among and help motivate the enemy
strains credulity.

So, plenty of blame to go around, Mike, though probably more blame
resides with the Administration.
--
"Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for Western Civilization as it
commits suicide."
Dr. Jerry Pournelle
.

Loading